greatsovietencyclopediafandomcom-20200214-history
Makhno Movement
Makhno Movement (in Russian, Makhnovshchina), an anti-Soviet anarchic kulak peasant movement in the Ukrainefrom 1918 to 1921, led by N. I. Makhno; one of the various forms taken by the petit bourgeoiscounterrevolution. The social base of the Makhno movement was the well-to-do peasantry of the Left-bank Ukraine,especially in Ekaterinoslav and Kharkov provinces, where a considerable stratification of thepeasantry could be observed as early as the late 19th century and where the proportion of kulakswas substantial. It was from this region that the Makhno movement drew its forces and materialresources and most of its leaders. However, the Makhnovshchina was not a local movement (unlikethe Antonov revolt, for example); it covered an extensive territory from the Dnestr to the Don.Makhno’s bands included many nationalities. The small town of Guliaipole in EkaterinoslavProvince became his “capital.” The prosperous strata of the Left-bank Ukrainian peasantry, whoafter the Revolution had acquired the estates of many large landholders in that area, had a decisiveinfluence on the political orientation of the Makhno movement. At times when there was a threat ofrestoration of the large landowners (under the German occupation and under the White Guards)relatively broad strata of the peasant masses joined the Makhno movement; in the struggle againstSoviet power the followers of Makhno drew their support from the well-to-do people in thecountryside. From 1921 the movement was supported only by the kulaks. Declassed elementsrallied to Makhno’s banners throughout the existence of his movement—deserters, former WhiteGuard soldiers, and criminals; in the final period these elements came to predominate. The size of his units fluctuated greatly, but there was always a nucleus of Makhno’s intimates andan elite cavalry corps. Makhno’s units were mainly recruited voluntarily, but at the height of themovement’s success some mobilizations were carried out. At times when Makhno’s “army”expanded, regiments, divisions, and even corps appeared, although their structure and numericalstrength were undetermined. When this “army” met with reverses, it would disperse, and Makhnowould flee from his pursuers together with his elite cavalry units. Makhno’s bands, consisting ofcavalry and mobile infantry mounted on machinegun carts, had great mobility, sometimes coveringas much as 100 km in 24 hours. Owing to the support of the local kulaks, they had well-organizedreconnaissance and communications. Their only source of military supplies was materiel capturedfrom the enemy. With respect to ideology, the Makhno movement espoused the slogans of a “powerless state” and“free Soviets,” which in practice meant a struggle against the proletarian state. Such leaders ofRussian anarchism as Volin (Eikhenbaum), Arshinov (Marin), Baron, and Gotman had considerableinfluence on the Makhno movement. Makhno’s staff included a so-called military revolutionarycouncil, in which the anarchists played a major role. The anarchists tried to establish regularpropaganda work and published the newspapers Put’k svobode, Golos makhnovtsa, and Vol’nyipovstanets. The Makhno movement arose in the spring of 1918 as part of the struggle of the Ukrainianpeasantry against the Austro-German occupiers. In April, Makhno and a group of anarchistsorganized a small detachment in the Guliaipole area and carried out a number of raids on theestates of large landowners and on the hetman’s police. By early November his band had grown to500, and by December it had swelled to 20,000 men. From November 1918 to January 1919,Makhno’s men fought against the Austrians and Germans and then against Petliura’s troops. InFebruary 1919, Makhno’s units became part of the Soviet Ukrainian Second, and later Thirteenth,Army, functioning at first as the Zadneprovskaia Brigade and then as the Ukrainian 7th Division.From March to May they participated in combat against Denikin’s forces on the Mariupol’-Volnovakha sector of the front. However, they sabotaged the orders of the Soviet command, droveoff commissars assigned to them, and suppressed the activity of food-requisitioning detachmentsand committees of the poor in their area. “Congresses of insurgent workers’ and peasants’deputies,” convened by Makhno’s followers in February and April, adopted resolutions opposing thepolicies of Soviet power. At this time the leaders of the Makhno movement took advantage ofmistakes made by Ukrainian leaders in agrarian policy (for example, the refusal to divide up theestates of the large landowners) and of the dissatisfaction of the middle strata of the peasantry withthe surplus-grain appropriation policy. In late May 1919, Makhno’s brigade was defeated by Denikin’s forces, and on May 29, refusing tosubmit to the Red Army command, it unilaterally withdrew from the front and retreated to theGuliaipole area, entering into open warfare against Soviet power. On June 8, Makhno and hisclosest supporters were declared outlaws. Under the Denikin occupation, Makhno’s forces foughtagainst the White Guard troops, achieving a series of successes. In the fall of 1919, Makhno’s“Revolutionary Insurgent Army of the Ukraine,” which was joined by a certain portion of the Soviettroops who had been cut off by the White Guards, grew in numbers, reaching a strength of 30,000-35,000. Denikin was forced to send a corps, headed by General Ia. A. Slashchov, againstMakhno’s men. In January 1920 the Red Army entered the Makhno movement’s zone of operations, and themajority of the soldiers in the Makhno units joined the Red Army’s ranks, while many others wentoff to their homes. On January 8 the command of the Fourteenth Army ordered Makhno to transferthe units remaining under him to the Kovel’ area, but he refused and began a revolt. During thespring and summer of 1920, Makhno engaged in warfare against Soviet power; however, he refusedoffers from Wrangel’s forces for joint operations with them. In September the White Guardsoccupied most of Makhno’s region, after which the Makhno movement took up armed struggleagainst them. An agreement was signed in mid-October in Kharkov between Makhno’srepresentatives and the commanders of the Southern Front for joint operations against Wrangel.Makhno’s cavalry detachment, about 2,000 strong, was directed to the Perekop area. However,after the defeat of the White Guards, Makhno once again refused to submit to Soviet power. By order of M. V. Frunze the liquidation of the Makhno movement began on November 25. On Dec.1, 1920, the Crimean group of Makhno’s forces was destroyed. In November and Decemberpowerful Red Army forces conducted operations in the Guliaipole-Sinel’nikovo area for the purposeof suppressing the Makhno movement, but Makhno himself escaped with his elite cavalry unit. Inthe spring of 1921, with the introduction of the NEP, the social base of the Makhno movementshrank considerably. Only a few small bands that survived by robbing the peasants remained underMakhno. In the Ukraine the Permanent Conference for the Struggle Against Banditry under theCouncil of People’s Commissars of the Ukrainian SSR was created; among its members were M.V. Frunze, F. E. Dzerzhinskii, S. I. Gusev, and M. K. Vladimirov. The overall leadership of militaryoperations was conducted by M. V. Frunze and R. P. Eideman. The All-Ukraine Central ExecutiveCommittee proclaimed amnesty for those who would surrender voluntarily. The unit headed byMakhno managed to evade destruction throughout the spring and summer of 1921, conducting raidsthroughout the Ukraine and southern Russia, until on August 26 near the city of lampol’, Makhnowas forced to flee with fifty cavalrymen across the Dnestr River and surrender to the Rumanianauthorities. REFERENCES Kubanin, M. Makhnovshchina. Leningrad, 1927. Trifonov, I. Ia. Klassy i klassovaia bor’ba v SSSR v nachale nepa (1921-1923), part 1. Leningrad,1964. Semanov, S. N. “Makhnovshchina i ee krakh.” Voprosy istorii, no. 9, 1966. S. N. SEMANOV